Pages

Friday, June 27, 2008

For those staying in SS2 or who passes SS2 regularly might have noticed the above billboard right opposite RHB Bank, at the traffic light junction.

It's huge billboard, initially put up with just the mugshot of the Selangor Menteri Besar, the Selangor Government crest, and the backdrop of the Shah Alam mosque, and interestingly enough, Sunway Lagoon Resort Hotel (whom I had initially thought paid for the billboard).

When newspapers covered the story, with concerns that the state government was extravagant with its expenses, it was found that the billboard company, Setia Media was the one who put it up.

And when residents complained that the billboard would have been more useful if the representatives' numbers were published, the company put up both Dr Cheah Wing Yin (ADUN for Damansara Utama) and my contacts almost immediately.

I don't have a problem having my service centre hotline and email details published. But I thought it was rather odd for the billboard company not to have the courtesy to inform us in advance. Hence I wasn't aware of it till I saw it for myself last week as I was passing by. Worse, they even got Dr Cheah's constituency wrong - it is published as "Damansara Damai".

And possibly more importantly, the billboard company should state clearly on the advertisement that it was sponsored by the company, and the state did not pay for anything for it. This will certainly go a long way towards clarifying to residents that the local politicians did not waste precious tax-payers money to "glorify" themselves.

Wednesday, June 25, 2008

If you have read my earlier post on Labuan International Business and Financial Centre (IFBC), then you would have noted that amongst the criticism I had was that the Government has not put in sufficient effort to ensure recognition of Labuan as an offshore financial centre as it has been excluded from the Malaysian double-taxation treaties with 11 countries and has been "blacklisted" by the South Korean government. An excerpt of my speech (pg 48) from the Hansard is as follows:

The Deputy Finance Minister, Dato' Haji Ahmad Husni bin Mohamad Hanadzlah however, insisted that Malaysia has not been "blacklisted" by any government and the South Korean allegation has arisen out of a misunderstaning or misperception created by a report by Financial Times. The excerpt from the Hansard (pg 78) is as follows:

Firstly, I would like to clarify that being "blacklisted" does not mean that Korean companies cannot continue to remain in Labuan but it means that they will not be able to enjoy the low tax regime in Labuan and at the same time they may be subjected to additional witholding tax by the South Korean government.

Secondly, the term "blacklisted" was not coined by Financial Times as alleged by the Deputy Minister. Baker Mckenzie, one of the largest and most reputable international law firms in the world, have reported in its circular update in 2006 that Korea has implemented special withholding procedure for "blacklisted" countries:

As part of the Korean government's efforts to combat perceived abusive tax avoidance structures used to channel investments into Korea, a new special tax withholding procedure was adopted... This new provision authorises the Ministry of Finance and Economy (MOFE) to designate countries or regions that it believes are frequently exploited for tax avoidance purposes. Entities located in a country or region placed on this "blacklist" by the MOFE are presumed to be tax treaty treaty shopping...

On June 30, 2006, MOFE placed Labuan, Malaysia on the blacklist of countries/regions presumed to be a jurisdiction used for tax avoidance purposes. To date, only Labuan has been placed on the blacklist.

Not only have Malaysia been blacklisted, we had the (dis)honour of being the first country/ region to have made it into the list.

It is unfortunate that in the passing of the amendment to the bill, the Minister have either misled the House or was ignorant or was misinformed of certain facts relating to the issue. The information I have was based on a report by an international and reputable legal practice which would have taken more than necessary due care and diligence to ensure that the statements made are true and accurate (or the Malaysian government can choose to sue them).

It is hence important that the Minister made the necessary clarifications in the House and inform the House on the remedial steps being taken by the Government to restore the integrity and credibility of the Labuan IBFC.

This is not a topic which will interest many people but we were debating the Labuan Offshore Financial Services (Amendment) Bill 2008 yesterday. You can get an idea of the bill (which I won't go into here, you can read the Deputy Minister of Finance's statement in the Hansard here, page 35).

I got my chance to debate the Bill, and thankfully this time, I didn't need to read at Rocket speed ;-). Below is the text of my speech, for those who are interested. The Deputy Minister had a subsequent response, which I will comment on, in a subsequent post. ;-)

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

This is an update to the post I wrote a few days ago with regards to a press statement issued by my DAP colleague, ADUN for Kg Tunku with regards to certain potential discrepancy in the local council appointments in MBPJ.

In MBPJ, it was announced that there will be a total of 24 new councilors of which four of them are from PAS, seven from PKR and six from DAP, with the remaining seven councilorship to be appointed from non-partisan nominees, i.e. NGOs and RAs in Petaling Jaya.

It is an important change, when compared to the previous Barisan Nasional Government, that NGO members are appointed to the local council to ensure increased transparency and good governance, and to ensure special and needy interest groups are taken into account, such as the appointment of Anthony Thanasayan, president of the Animal Assisted Therapy for the Disabled and Elderly Association.

However, I have been informed that a member of a political party replaced a non-partisan local Petaling Jaya residents' association president under the NGO quota in MBPJ. In addition, I've been made to understand that this was done at the very last minute to avoid possible objections to the move.

I'd like to express my regret and disappointment that such action has blemished an otherwise excellent step taken by the Selangor state government to include NGO participation while waiting for the local government to be democratically elected in the near future.

I'd like to call upon the Selangor state government to review its decision, to ensure that all party members are placed strictly within the party quotas i.e., 7 from PKR, 6 from DAP and 4 from PAS and only genuine and reputable NGO members as well as leaders of local residents' associations are given strict priority.

I would also be interested to find out if the above is happening to other local councils as well in Selangor.

I have voted against the motion together with my other Pakatan Rakyat colleagues. The Government won the vote with 129 votes against 78 votes. The high profile pair from SAPP were missing from the Parliament.

My reasons to vote against the motion was to be expressed in my speech, attached below, which unfortunately didn't get to see the light of day as I didn't get a chance to speak. 9 MPs from the opposition got to speak - 4 from PAS, 2 from PKR, 2 from DAP and 1 supposed Independent.

My speech is as follows (a large part of which I have taken from my earlier blog post here.)

Despite voting enbloc with my other opposition colleagues, I voted with my consciences with only the interest of Malaysians in my mind. We could only have hoped that our honourable members on the other side of the fence can do the same.

In the face of widespread public criticism, particularly on the Internet with regards to the issue that my DAP colleague, ADUN for Subang Jaya, Hannah Yeoh has been "banned" from the school prefects reunion which is being held outside of the school as blogged here earlier.

Now, the teachers and prefects of the school are threatened further by the school authorities that action will be taken if they were to attend the event and Hannah is present. Hannah has updated on her blog that:

I have just received a call informing me that a meeting has been held in their school this morning further threatening the prefects and even the teachers - if they attend the reunion, they will be sacked. Some people think this is a minor issue.

This is not a petty or a political issue. Teachers who want to attend the function to see their ex-students also face the threat of losing their jobs. Looks like the leadership style of the principal or the education ministry is nothing but suppression.

This is becoming a complete farce and I'll definitely find the appropriate opportunity in Parliament to berate the Minister of Education on this issue. What a farce.

I have argued, and so have most of my opposition colleagues that the Government's inflation rate calculation is faulty and needs to be desperately revamped as it has failed to reflect the real world.

Throughout the campaign period, we have ridiculed the 2% inflation index as announced by the Government. Can you believe that inflation is only 2%?

Today, to a supplementary question posted by BAGAN, the Second Finance Minister, Nor Mohamed Yaacob admitted as much that the inflation index published by the Government does not reflect reality. He announced that the current make up of the inflation index is being revamped to better reflect what is on the ground.

It's a big admission, for the Government has been measuring its "excellent performance" and praised the health of the economy by quoting the "low" inflation index. Will try to extract the Hansard text tomorrow.

Sunday, June 22, 2008

Yes, DAP organised forums - which were frequently held in the months before the elections are back. This time, the DAP Socialist Youth (DAPSY) is organising an English forum on "The Malaysian Oil Dilemma". The details are as follows:

I'll be speaking again on the related topic of fuel price hikes at the same venue, same time on Thursday 26th on the fuel price hikes. There's plenty to discuss on the issue and I'll assume that 80% of my content will be different between the 2 forums ;-) See you there!

No, I haven't yet been banned from any official school reunions in Malaysia, well, it can only be from my primary school in Batu Pahat as I studied in Singapore for my secondary school. (Incidentally, my fellow alumni will include Sdr Lim Guan Eng, now Chief Minister of Penang as well as (if I'm not wrong), Sdr Lim Kit Siang)

But my colleague, the DAP state assemblywoman for Subang Jaya, has not only been prevented from stepping into official school functions (all DAP, PKR and PAS representatives will have problems getting into schools), she has even been "banned" from attending a school prefects' reunion to be held outside the school!

Few months ago, I was invited to the Prefects' Reunion of SMK Subang Utama to be held next week. I just received news that I could no longer attend the function because I'm an assemblyman from Pakatan Rakyat.

Two prefects have confirmed that the teachers have issued a threat to the prefects to withdraw their invitation to me and if not, the event would be cancelled.

She was actually the Head Prefect for her school back in 1995. Read her full comments on her blog here.

This clearly comes from a Barisan Nasional government mentality which obviously has not come to terms with the fact that they have lost the trust of the people in these constituencies and these voters/residents have a right to meet and hear from their elected representatives.

I think the responsible administrators are still stuck in dinosaur age, and are obviously not helping the country move forward, particularly in creating a first class education system. I'm pretty disgusted actually.

Saturday, June 21, 2008

I've received several calls from reporters and friends after reading a leaked list of councillors in The Star Metro yesterday. I couldn't comment much on the list as I wasn't directly involved in the final selection process.

However, my colleague, ADUN for Kampung Tunku has issued a press statement as copied below from his blog, and it's makes for some concerned reading.

A mockery for PR if partisan nominees appointed as councilors under NGO quotaIt has been negotiated that there will be an average of 6 non-partisan councillors in each local council in Selangor excluding Orang Besar Kaya Besar Daerah (OKBD). In Selangor, there are altogether nine OKBDs in each local councils except for Petaling Jaya City Hall (MBPJ), Subang Jaya Municipal Council (MPSJ) and Ampang Jaya Municipal Council (MPAJ).

In Petaling Jaya City Hall, there will be a total of 24 new councilors of which four of them are from PAS, seven from PKR and six from DAP, with the remaining seven councilorship to be appointed from non-partisan nominees, i.e. NGOs and RAs in Petaling Jaya.

The Star Metro has published a list of councilors for MBPJ today and I was requested to comment on it. For a city with various active NGOs in town, political parties should not hijack councillorship reserved for NGOs and RAs in MBPJ.

Sad to say, from the list of unconfirmed names reported in the Star Metro today, I can notice that there are efforts by certain party to insert party members as councilors in MBPJ under NGO quota as there are only six NGO and RA councilors in the list, namely Richard Yeoh (TI), Anthony Thanasayagan (Coordinator of Malaysians Against Discrimination of the Disabled), Dr Melasutra bt Md Dali (Town Planner), Cynthia Manonmani a/p Michael Gabriel (Suaram), Derek Fernandez (prominent lawyer on local governance) and Paneer Sivam (labourer activitist) with no representatives from residents association.

It is my stand that the seven non-partisan nominees should be purely reserved for non-partisan nominees, i.e. NGOs and RAs in Petaling Jaya. Else it will be a mockery for Pakatan Rakyat.

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

This topic has been hanging in the air for a fairly long time, but I've yet to comment on it - partly because, the DAP MP for Klang, Charles Santiago has repeatedly given his views on this issue which I share wholeheartedly.

The Selangor Government has made it a point as one of the first 100 days target and achievement to be providing 20 cubic metres of free water to all households. And the Selangor Government achieved it through the simplest of means, the state government footing the bill for it to the water concessionaire.

I do not believe that this is the right policy prescription towards creating a more compassionate state, particularly for the lower-income groups - an objective which I share wholeheartedly. And providing free water to all households, without conditions, is a fairly inefficient way of achieving such an objective.

First of all, everyone, whether they can afford it or otherwise, gets the free water and hence the solution isn't targeted at all towards the lower income group. Secondly, so a policy typically encourages wastage despite water (particularly in Selangor) being a precious and scarce resource.

I remain consistent in my position that the best way to approach the problem of assisting the lower income group is to provide the cash benefits directly to them. That way, they can choose to spend the benefit according to their own personal needs, be it water, fuel or other basic necessities. Overall, for the same amount of money poured on subsidies, the poor will benefit more (as the wealthier groups will not get the subsidy). Or alternatively, for the same amount of subsidy per individual, the state will save more as they don't have to subsidise the wealthier households.

The government, both federal and state must re-look into the traditional ways by which we have forked out subsidies, their distortionary impact and untargeted mechanism in meeting their welfare objectives.

Coalition Against Water Privatisation (CAWP) coordinator Charles Santiago said the Selangor government should have done a comprehensive study before carrying out the move as the cost to be borne by the government would be too high.

“To subsidise 1.5 million households in Selangor, the government would have to fork out almost RM11mil per month and more than RM132 million a year,” he said.

He suggested that that the Selangor government should consider rain harvesting instead as it would save the people more than the RM11 they enjoy with the rebate.

“Through water audits, the water bills can also be reduced by up to 30-40%,” he said.

Santiago, who is also Klang MP, added that the rebate would also cause people to waste water as “people would waste anything that comes free”.

“In five years time, we will be facing a water crisis just as how we are facing an oil crisis now. We can live without petrol, but we can’t live without water,” he pointed out.

---

DAP’s Klang MP Charles Santiago said Selangor government’s first 20-cubic-metres (20,000 litres) free water policy was not properly well-thought before it was announced.

Santiago, who is also Coalition Against Water Privatisation (CAWP) coordinator, said: “I will maintain that households earning a monthly income of RM1,500 and below should still get free water. No question about it. I think those in the rich category would consider it an insult for not being charged.

“But the monies may have been better used for other facilities like helping buildings set up rain-harvesting systems which encourages conservation of processed water,” he told theSun when contacted.

It is worth noting that this "free water" policy will cost the Selangor state government RM10.4 million per month, or RM128 million a year. State governments are not known for their wealth, despite Selangor being the richest state in the country. RM128 million works out to a little more than 10% of the state's annual income. Is that the best way to expend a very substantial portion of the state's very limited funds and resources?

In taking the first step towards introducing such laws, PAS Youth will organise a seminar in August to discuss the possibility of doing so.

And the Deputy Youth Chief, Azman Shapawi Abdul Rani went to the extent of saying that DAP will be willing to consider such laws since "not all leaders in DAP have the same position (against such laws)". He quoted the example that:

“If we look at the DAP leadership in Penang, they are very open and tolerant. They also raise the allowances of religious teachers,” he said.

Ummm... sir, the DAP leadership in Penang is indeed "very open and tolerant". We have raised the allowances of religious teachers because we believe in religious freedom, we recognise that Islam is the official religion in this country, and religious teachers have their place in society.

Hence by the very very same reason that we are "very open and tolerant", it'll necessarily mean that we cannot implement laws which are clearly "closed and intolerant", e.g., Malaysians fined up to RM500 for wearing "offending clothes" such as tight fitting blouses, jeans, shorts and mini-skirts as per Kota Bahru.

There are a lot of common issues which Pakatan Rakyat component parties can focus their energies on, including ethical and moral issues such as fighting drug abuse, crime and Mat Rempit menace, as well as building a kind and compassionate society which are clearly more important than issues such as "how tight is your blouse".

If there is continued and increased lobbying by PAS leaders for implementation of laws such as the above, it will at some point make Pakatan Rakyat coalition untenable. I for one, dare say that despite having won Petaling Jaya Utara parliamentary seat with nearly 20,000 majority, it will be among the first to fall in the next elections, should an "open and tolerant" society which we strongly believe in is threatened.

But before proceeding to share your 2 sen, let me first share the key assumptions behind the policies suggested:

Welfare provision is a key responsibility of the government for the less fortunate in the country. (Otherwise, it'll just mean no subsidies or grants at all)

The policies below are formulated based on the principle that product subsidies tend to be very distortionary and unevenly distributed, hence a more targeted approach is required.

The exact quantum of award/bonus suggested below may require further adjustment with more precise data from Government.

Please also read the following in conjunction with the other posts I've put up on this blog. It may make more sense that way ;-)

The EPF is a social security institution formed according to the Laws of Malaysia, Employees Provident Fund Act 1991 (Act 452) which provides retirement benefits for members through management of their savings in an efficient and reliable manner. With rising costs of living, extended life expectancy and more expensive medical treatments, it is critical that Malaysians save as much as possible to ensure sufficient funds for retirement. It is also important for as many Malaysians as possible to be included in the system.

However, as studies have shown, low-income Malaysians are facing significant difficulties in saving enough via EPF. As a result, the Government must act to assist this group of Malaysians who face various challenges in the face of globalisation, particularly with a stagnant or declining real wages. This is clearly reflected in the 9th Malaysia Plan Gini coefficient statistics where by income disparity among Malaysians has widened substantially. Malaysia ranked highest in terms of income inequality in Southeast Asia.

To assist low and medium-waged workers, DAP proposes to raise the Employer EPF Contribution Rate from the current 12% of total wages to 15%, representing a 25% increase. This will in turn raise the total contribution from the employer and employee to the fund to a total of 26%.

At the same time, in view of the increase in cost for the employers, which may in turn affect the competitiveness of Malaysian companies, it is proposed that a limit of RM8,000 per month or RM96,000 per annum be set to Employer contributions to the EPF. That means that for employees earning above the limit, their EPF contributions will continue to be calculated at the limit level.

However, for middle-age workers who are earning below RM1,400 per month , it is clear that they will continue to face severe challenges despite the increase in employer’s EPF contribution. Whilst younger workers may be learning the ropes and learn new skills to upgrade their income level, older workers will face difficulties in our fast-changing economic environment and are in the greatest need of assistance from the state to make ends meet.

With the oil and gas sector contributing handsomely to the state coffers, it only makes social sense to share part of these gains with the less fortunate and lower income tiers within our society. However, at the same time, we still need to continue to incentivise these workers to secure employment to avoid over-dependence on the state. Hence, DAP proposes “FairWage”, an integral component of MENUS in promoting social justice. FairWage has a 3-prong strategy for implementation:

To increase that take-home pay, workers will contribute a lower rate to the EPF. For with pay below RM900 per month, employee contribution to the fund will be waived while for those with income of not more than RM1,400 per month, the employee's contribution to EPF shall be reduced from the current 11% to 5%.

To make them more employable, employers will reduce their rate of contribution to the EPF. For workers above the age of 35 to 55, earning between RM900 to RM1,400 per month, the employer contribution shall remain at the current 12%. For those earning less than RM900 per month in the same age group, the employer contribution shall decline to 10%.

To compensate for the above, the Government will give workers FairWage income supplements to achieve a higher level of income. For workers aged 45 and above, receiving monthly income below RM900 per month, they will receive an annual income supplement Proposed 2008 Malaysian Budget Democratic Action Party of RM2,400. For those workers above the age of 35 earning less than RM1,400 per month will receive RM1,600 per annum. Of the supplement, a quarter shall be in cash form, while the balance will be channelled into the EPF accounts. By channelling a larger portion into the EPF, it will help the workers save for their future needs. An additional 10% on top of the income supplement shall be applied to those who live in the Klang Valley, Johor Bahru as well as on the Penang Island to cope with the higher cost of living.

As an example, a 48 year old worker in Muar earning RM800 per month used to take home RM712, will find his take-home pay increased by 19.4% or RM138 (RM88 + RM50) to RM850. At the same time, despite a reduction in employer contribution to 10%, the overall contribution to the EPF account will increase from RM184 to RM230, representing a 25% increment. His total monthly income will hence be RM1,080, an increment of 19.5% from before.

As a separate example, a 42 year old worker in Kuala Terengganu earning RM1,200 per month will find his take-home pay increased by 9.9% or RM105.33 (RM72 + RM33.33) fromRM1,068 to RM1,173. At the same time, the overall contribution to the EPF account will increase from RM276 to RM316 monthly, representing a 14.5% increment. His total monthly income will hence be RM1,489, an increment of 10.8% from before.

“FairWage” is not an original idea but an adaptation of best practices successfully implemented in other advanced countries. For example, in the United States, “Earned Income Tax Credit” acts like a negative income tax for low-wage workers, supplementing their earned income. Similarly, the UK has implemented a “Working Tax Credit” which has helped to reduce poverty and encourage work. While most recently, Singapore has introduced “Workfare” which supplements the income of older low-wage workers.

In addition to assisting current workers registered with the EPF, FairWage will also provide incentives for more workers, particularly odd-job or ad hoc labourers to insist on registration with the EPF by their employers due to higher pay. As a result, the overall system will be more inclusive for Malaysians, particularly those from lower income groups.

On top of that, DAP would introduce a “Malaysia Bonus” which will vary in accordance to the performance of the economy whereby poorer Malaysians will be able to share the fruits of the country's wealth. For 2oo8, the Malaysia Bonus shall be paid to those who have worked at least 6 months in 2007 based on their last drawn pay in December 2007. The Malaysia Bonus shall be channelled directly into the worker's EPF account and shall be available for immediate withdrawal.

Those earning less than RM3,000 per month but at least RM2,400 will receive RM300

Those earning less than RM2,400 per month but at least RM1,800 will receive RM600

Those earning less than RM1,800 per month but at least RM1,200 will receive RM900

Those earning less than RM1,200 per month will receive RM1,200

We will review the above schemes annually to determine the best mechanisms to achieve a better living quality for all Malaysians without detrimental effects to a person's incentive to seek work. As an integral part of MENUS, the above policies will ensure that all Malaysians in need are taken cared of by the Government, the country's wealth is shared equitably and no community will be left behind.

(The above policies form the foundation of DAP's call for up to RM3,000 be granted to deserving Malaysians to help them achieve a fairer deal. By our estimates, the above policy will cost substantially less than what the Government currently spends on subsidies but it goes directly to the people who needs it.)

Friday, June 06, 2008

The Rocket is the monthly newspaper published by the Democratic Action Party (DAP). While the standards and quality have improved in the months leading to the March 8th elections, financial contraints meant that we had to rely heavily on volunteers and freelancers to do a fair bit of the work, plus the publishing schedule often getting out of whack.

Well, I've been tasked to take the Rocket forward and create a professional outfit which will further raise the bar for the DAP. The Rocket publishes regularly in English and Chinese, and occasionally in Malay. Now and then, a Tamil edition will appear. I'd like to change that, and we are now looking to hire a young (we'll take the young-at-heart as well ;-)) and dynamic team to make this happen all within the next few months. Longer term ambitions will include online and broadcast capabilities.

For those interested, you may apply for the available positions here via Jobstreet:

Sigh. My brains must be getting totally scrambled. Lost my wallet which contains everything I had, IC, passport, cards etc. 2 months ago, and now I just lost my phone as well. Thank goodness I did a sync with my notebook about 2 weeks ago, which means that the bulk of my data remains intact.

Took a flight out to Ho Chi Minh City to celebrate the missus' birthday for the weekend after returning from the trip to Hong Kong. I must have dropped my phone in a taxi earlier. Anyway, I'm now "stuck" here in Saigon, and I'd be incommunicado til Tuesday morning after I get myself a new SIM card.

For those who needs to reach me urgently, email will now be the best method.

The Government is not doing enough to alleviate the plight of ordinary Malaysians facing substantial increase in prices of essential goods after the fuel and electricity price hikes.

The Government has announced drastic reduction in fuel subsidies which will result in substantially higher fuel and electricity prices yesterday. As a result, there will be 78sen increase in petrol prices to RM2.70/liter from RM1.92/liter. Diesel is now RM2.58/liter up RM1 from RM 15.8/liter. Electricity tariffs are also expected to rise in the coming months.

While the increase in prices are expected and in all probabilities, unavoidable, what is perhaps more important is the Government's mechanism to redistribute the savings from the subsidies to ordinary Malaysians who are in need of assistance.

For now, the Government has announced cash payments by vehicle size. This involves annual payments of RM625 for vehicles below 2L engine capacity, RM150 for motorcycles below 250CC engine capacity. Road tax is reduced by RM200 for vehicles above 2L and by RM50 for motorcycles above 250CC.

While these measures seem fair and innovative at first look, they are clearly short-term in nature and have clearly failed to address the key pressing issues below:

These efforts continue to distort transportation patterns, prices and preferences without encouraging or promoting the use of public transport. There are no incentives for Malaysians particularly those in urban regions to switch to public transportation which reduces our dependency of petrol, unclogs roads, and reduces impact on the environment as subsidies are given to vehicle owners. There is even talk about subsidies for buses to be reduced.

The country is expected to save RM13.7B from the reduction in subsidies but the savings are earmarked for everything except improving public transport which will help us in the long run.

Increase in fuel prices should be announced concurrently with concrete plans to expedite the construction of mass transportation networks, such as extending the LRT and bus feeder system or to improve the existing networks. Without such plans, it does not bode well for the Klang Valley and other urban centres where traffic congestion is common place and public transport is poor.

Finally, energy prices will result in secondary price increases of all our daily essential goods and services. The proposed vehicle-based cash rebates will only benefit those owning cars or motorcycles but not help those without who will still suffer from the price increase of everyday items. Incidentally, the affected will more likely belong to lower income group who need help to combat the effects of secondary inflation caused my reduced subsidies.

I am repeating DAP's call on the government to adopt the grant scheme of up to RM3000 per working individual depending on income levels to be paid through the EPF mechanism. Consumers will then have the choice to utilize the grant in a manner which best meets their needs and will receive the grant whether they currently own cars, motorcycles or otherwise. Aiding the rakyat using the EPF is also cheaper and less cumbersome because it is an existing avenue for channelling funds back to the people.

Thursday, June 05, 2008

I won't have enough time to do a complete post on the issue of oil price hike at this point of time. I'll be issuing a statement on it soon enough. But in a gist, I believe that the fuel price hike is economically unavoidable, and persistence in existing low fuel prices will have major detrimental impact on the country's economy in the medium and longer term. The question isn't so much the hike, but what the government does with the savings.

I've written from various angles the issue (subsidies, oil and gas) on this site previously. You can read them here:

I've added here below excerpts from a post by Shin Liang, who is waiting to pursue his PhD overseas in 3 months time, which I thought was interesting food for thought.

I think almost all blogs in Malaysia will be about the increase in petrol price today. But I think my stand on this issue will be different from the rest, because I'm in favor of the price increase!

Yes, all the arguments against the price hike has its merit. And as a consumer myself, I can feel the pain too. But from a country point of view, it was necessary.

For long, our country's economy has relied on exports of raw material. In particular, oil export has proven to be a lucrative business. However, our dwindling oil reserves means that we can continue to enjoy this business for only another 10 years (or so). This means we need to plan ahead and 10 years is pretty short from a country's economy point of view.

For every cent of subsidy in petrol price, we are in fact taking away funds that could be use to prepare our country for the years after our oil reserves are depleted. The profit obtained from the price hike should be invested in building infrastructure, transportation and help building more research centers and improve our university such that we are still competitive when our oil reserves are gone.

The ratio of income per capita and the petrol price is Malaysia is obviously unreasonable and the price hike will definitely have a short term impact. But to improve this ratio, the govt. have to either reduce/maintain the price or to improve the income per capita. As of the current situation, it'd be difficult to improve the income per capita without having to resort to the increase in petrol price. Hence, this price hike is a necessary short term pain for a long term gain.

[...]

This petrol price hike could be a good thing for Malaysians, really. But if and only if the profits from this increase in price is put into good use. And knowing our govt., this should be our grave concern. Out of the 70 cents increase, how much of it will go to corruption and how much will go to developing our nation? Unfortunately, without transparency, we can only hope.

If the funds are used to build another twin towers, then please "kill me". I'd rather if the govt. use the funds to build infrastructures that could promote economic activities, to build things that will be catalyst to economic growth. For example, improving our transportation system, communication system, research centers etc.

Tuesday, June 03, 2008

The deadline for the submission of questions has just elapsed. And no, I won't get my mugshot splashed on the front page of the national newspapers for not having submitted my questions, much as the publicity might have been nice ;-).

As usual, the list of 15 questions submitted are below, with a greater emphasis placed on the Ministry of Finance, and the rest split between the education ministries, the prime ministers' department as well as the Ministry of Home Affairs.

Thank you so much to those who have offered good suggestions both here and via email - believe me, they were all compiled and tabled and considered in depth before being shortlisted. And some questions which were not taken up by me were forwarded to some of the other DAP MPs.

They have also hopefully been drafted to extract quality and informative responses from the Ministers, as opposed to questions which will just secure a rhetorical answers which serves little purpose. Bear in mind the 40 word limit, which is being enforced strictly this time round, which often limits the extent to which you can push or "clarify" in detail the questions.

Well, here's my list and lets hope we get good answers from the Ministers:

Monday, June 02, 2008

Hi guys. My access to internet is terrible at the moment as I'm on in working business networking trip to Hong Kong with the Penang Chief Minister. Should be back in action again next week, hence apologies for the lack of posts as well as slower replies to emails and comments. ;-)

UBAH Rocket Style

Twitter Updates

Facebook Profile

Google+ Followers

About Me

I was elected in March 2008, the Member of Parliament for Petaling Jaya Utara under the Democratic Action Party (DAP). I'm also the DAP National Publicity Secretary, as well as the investment liaison officer for the Penang Chief Minister based in the Klang Valley.

Before joining politics full-time in January 2007, I was the CEO and founder of a Malaysian IT company, publicly listed in Singapore. I divested all my shares in the company to be able to serve the community and take part in socio-political affairs of Malaysia.

I've always had faith that there has been a guardian angel looking after me all these while - my personal well-being, my education, my career. Some will call it "God's will", some "fate" while some others, "destiny". I strongly believe that it is time for me to repay the kindness and fortune showered on me by my family, the society and of course, not forgetting, my guardian angel. :-)